European Journal of Cancer
Volume 41, Issue 11 , Pages 1528-1532, July 2005

Assessment of the value of confirming responses in clinical trials in oncology

  • Jose Luis Perez-Gracia

      Affiliations

    • Medical Oncology Department, Clínica Universitaria de Navarra, Avenida de Pío XII 36, 31008 Pamplona, Spain
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +34 658 92 02 12; fax: +34 948 255 500.
  • ,
  • Maria Muñoz

      Affiliations

    • Clinical Research Department, Eli Lilly and Company, Madrid, Spain
  • ,
  • Grant Williams

      Affiliations

    • US Food and Drug Administration, USA
  • ,
  • Jun Wu

      Affiliations

    • Clinical Research Department, Eli Lilly and Company Indianapolis, USA
  • ,
  • Eva Carrasco

      Affiliations

    • Clinical Research Department, Eli Lilly and Company, Madrid, Spain
  • ,
  • Ignacio Garcia-Ribas

      Affiliations

    • Clinical Research Department, Eli Lilly and Company, Madrid, Spain
  • ,
  • Ana Peiro

      Affiliations

    • Clinical Research Department, Eli Lilly and Company, Madrid, Spain
  • ,
  • Jose Maria Lopez-Picazo

      Affiliations

    • Medical Oncology Department, Clínica Universitaria de Navarra, Avenida de Pío XII 36, 31008 Pamplona, Spain
  • ,
  • Alfonso Gurpide

      Affiliations

    • Medical Oncology Department, Clínica Universitaria de Navarra, Avenida de Pío XII 36, 31008 Pamplona, Spain
  • ,
  • Ana Chopitea

      Affiliations

    • Medical Oncology Department, Clínica Universitaria de Navarra, Avenida de Pío XII 36, 31008 Pamplona, Spain
  • ,
  • Salvador Martín-Algarra

      Affiliations

    • Medical Oncology Department, Clínica Universitaria de Navarra, Avenida de Pío XII 36, 31008 Pamplona, Spain
  • ,
  • Jesus García-Foncillas

      Affiliations

    • Medical Oncology Department, Clínica Universitaria de Navarra, Avenida de Pío XII 36, 31008 Pamplona, Spain
  • ,
  • Johannes Blatter

      Affiliations

    • Clinical Research Department, Eli Lilly and Company, Frankfort, Germany

Received 6 December 2004; received in revised form 20 January 2005; accepted 27 January 2005.

Abstract 

The requirement for a second assessment to confirm initial tumour response is required by all response guidelines. Its rationale, however, is not clear. We have conducted this study to compare validity of response rate assessment determined with and without secondary confirmation. Using specified criteria, nine trials of one single cytotoxic drug including 416 patients were selected from a pharmaceutical database. Objective response rates were determined by a single determination and by two separate determinations. 81 responses (19.5%, [15.8–23.6%]) were scored by the confirmation method and 97 responses (23.3% [19.3–27.7%]) by the no-confirmation method. The Kappa (κ) coefficient of 0.89 indicates good agreement between both methods. This is the first study that systematically compares response rates calculated with and without performing response confirmation. Results show good agreement between both methods. We suggest that assessing response without confirmation may be the preferred method. These results should be confirmed by additional studies in a variety of cancer settings.

Keywords: Response assessment, Response guidelines, Clinical trials

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0959-8049(05)00210-8

doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2005.01.023

European Journal of Cancer
Volume 41, Issue 11 , Pages 1528-1532, July 2005